Mkuze Interchange

CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF MKUZE INTERCHANGE ON NATIONAL ROUTE 2, SECTION 31 (KM29.30), MKUZE, JOZINI LOCAL MUNICIPALITY

FOR: ENVIROEDGE

Frans Prins MA (Archaeology)

Hester Roodt BA (Hons) Archaeology; Hons (Anatomy)

P.O. Box 947 Howick 3290

[email protected] 30 December 2014 Fax: 0867636380 www.activeheritage.webs.com

Active Heritage for Enviroedge i Mkuze Interchange

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE PROJECT ...... 1 1.1. Details of the area surveyed: ...... 2 2 BACKGROUND TO ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY OF AREA ...... 2 3 BACKGROUND INFORMATION OF THE SURVEY ...... 6 3.1 Methodology ...... 7 3.2 Restrictions encountered during the survey ...... 7 3.2.1 Visibility ...... 7 3.2.2 Disturbance ...... 7 3.3 Details of equipment used in the survey ...... 7 4 DESCRIPTION OF SITES AND MATERIAL OBSERVED ...... 7 4.1 Locational data ...... 7 5 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE (HERITAGE VALUE) ...... 8 5.1 Field Rating...... 9 6 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 10 7 RISK PREVENTATIVE MEASURES ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ...... 10 8 MAPS AND PHOTOGRAPHS ...... 11 9 REFERENCES ...... 15

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Background information ...... 1 Table 2. Evaluation and statement of significance…………………………………………5 Table 3. Field rating and recommended grading of sites (SAHRA 2005) ...... 9

Active Heritage for Enviroedge ii Mkuze Interchange

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

EIA Early Iron Age

ESA Early Stone Age

HISTORIC PERIOD Since the arrival of the white settlers - c. AD 1820 in this part of the country

IRON AGE Early Iron Age AD 200 - AD 1000 Late Iron Age AD 1000 - AD 1830

IIA Intermediate Iron Age ISA Intermediate Stone Age LIA Late Iron Age

LSA Late Stone Age

MSA Middle Stone Age

NEMA National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998 and associated regulations (2006).

NHRA National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act No. 25 of 1999) and associated regulations (2000)

SAHRA South African Heritage Resources Agency

STONE AGE Early Stone Age 2 000 000 - 250 000 BP Middle Stone Age 250 000 - 25 000 BP Late Stone Age 30 000 - until c. AD 200

Active Heritage for Enviroedge iii Mkuze Interchange

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A cultural heritage survey of a proposed construction of the Mkuze Interchange on National Route 2, Section 31 (KM29.30), Mkuze, Jozini Local Municipality produced no heritage sites. The area is also not part of any known cultural landscape. There is no known archaeological reason why the development may not proceed as planned. However, it should be noted that the general area is rich in archaeological and contemporary grave sites. Construction work may expose material and attention is drawn to the South African Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act No. 25 of 1999) and the KwaZulu-Natal Heritage Act (Act no 4 of 2008) which, requires that operations that expose archaeological or historical remains should cease immediately, pending evaluation by the provincial heritage agency.

1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE PROJECT

Table 1. Background information

Consultant: F Prins & H Roodt (Active Heritage cc ) for Enviroedge Type of development: The South African National Roads Agency SOC Limited (SANRAL) has proposed the construction of the Mkuze Interchange on National Route 2 section 31 (km 29.30). The project area is located at the National Route 2 (N2-31) and P234 junction at 27°37'28.78"S 32° 1'35.47"E. This is the main entrance into Mkuze town and is situated within Ward 20 of the Jozini Local Municipality. The project aims to provide an improved and safer access for vehicles entering and exiting Mkuze while accommodating both current and predicted traffic volumes and pedestrian activity. The proposed Mkuze Interchange consists of the following components: • The strengthening of the existing road pavements • The addition of an access interchange with a grade separated bridge including new cross roads • Various alternative layouts for the interchange will be investigated throughout the process • The investigation of taking the N2 over the cross road P234 • The addition of taxi lay byes and market stalls • The addition of two on ramps and two off ramps (north and south) • The adding and lengthening of drainage structures • Possible 6.5m wide temporary deviation to accommodate two-way traffic during construction • New road signs for the Mkuze Interchange • Borrow pit and quarry investigations for gravel and rock materials

Active Heritage cc for Enviroedge 1 Mkuze Interchange

• Potential improvements to street lighting Rezoning or subdivision: Not applicable Terms of reference To carry out a Heritage Impact Assessment as subcontracted by Enviroedge Legislative requirements: The Heritage Impact Assessment was carried out in terms of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) (NEMA) and following the requirements of the National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act No. 25 of 1999) (NHRA) and the KwaZulu-Natal Heritage Act, 1997 (Act No. 4 of 2008)

1.1. Details of the area surveyed:

The project area is located at the National Route 2 (N2-31) and P234 junction at 27°37'28.78"S 32° 1'35.47"E. This is the main entrance into Mkuze town and is situated within Ward 20 of the Jozini Local Municipality (Fig 1).

2 BACKGROUND TO ARCHAEOLOGICAL HISTORY OF AREA

Mkuze is situated in the southern part of the greater Maputaland – an area endowed with heritage sites of various traditions and periods spanning the Stone Ages, Iron Ages and the historical period. However, the majority of these occur to the west of the Phongola river in the foothills of the Lebombo Mountains. A second large concentration occurs adjacent to and on the dune gordon along the coastline. The coastal plain, by contrast to the rest of Maputaland, is devoid of known archaeological sites. Oliver Davies, an archaeologist who conducted pioneer research and surveys in northern KwaZulu Natal in the 1960’s and 1970’s, commented that the coastal plain was unpromising for archaeological research due to its being covered by superficial sands and bush coverage which affect preservation and visibility (Avery 1980). By contrast, the foothills of the Lebombo in the vicinity of Mkuze and Ingwavuma is well endowed with archaeological sites. The provincial heritage data base of the KwaZulu- Natal Museum lists twenty nine sites in this general area. These include Early Stone Age, Middle Stone Age, Later Stone Age and Later Iron Age sites.

Based on typological criteria it can be speculated that the known Early Stone Age sites in the greater Mkuze area most probably dates back to between 300 000 and 1.7

Active Heritage cc for Enviroedge 2 Mkuze Interchange

million years ago. Some of the stone tools have been identified as belonging to the Acheulian tradition and it is therefore possible that these sites were occupied by an early hominin such as Homo erectus or Homo ergaster. Middle Stone Age Sites dates back to ca. 40 000 - 200 000 BP. These sites relate to the first anatomically modern people in the world namely Homo sapiens sapiens. Most of the Middle Stone Age sites in the greater Maputaland are open air stone tool scatters with little archaeological context. However, some notable cave deposits do occur. The world renowned Border Cave Site, situated approximately 65km to the north of the town of Ingwavuma, is a good example. Humans lived at Border Cave over a period of 200 000 years. The human skeletal remains found in the cave are believed to be some of the oldest evidence of anatomically modern human beings. Various radiometric-dating techniques suggest that Middle Stone Age people were living at Border Cave more than 110 000 years ago. More than a million stone artefacts have been excavated in the cave and an enormous amount if animal material has been recovered from the site as well (Derwent 2006).

Only a handful of Later Stone Age sites have been recorded in the greater Maputaland. These relate to San hunter-gatherers or their immediate ancestors. The stone tool technology are smaller and more diverse and specialised than those made during the Middle Stone Age.

The Early Iron Age of the coastal zone in Maputaland contains ceramic fragments identified as belonging to the Matola phase. The Matola phase sites can be identified with the very first Bantu-speaking agriculturists that entered KwaZulu-Natal approximately 1 600 years ago from Eastern Africa (Maggs 1989). Later Iron Age sites and evidence for iron smelting activities have been recorded at the Mkuze Game Reserve in the past.

Although oral history indicate that the area was occupied in more recent centuries times by the Thembe-Thonga or their immediate ancestors archaeological sites belonging to this period have not yet been identified. Nevertheless the present African inhabitants of the area, the Thembe-Thonga and the Swazi, have a rich oral history and culture relating to their intimate relationship with the environment spanning many centuries. Aspects of their cultural heritage identified by community representatives as being important include the following:  Relationship of the local community with the physical environment

Active Heritage cc for Enviroedge 3 Mkuze Interchange

 Traditional fishing practises (fonya basket fishing)  The indawo spirit possession cult  Wild fruit utilisation  The significance of the mothers brother in Thembe-Thonga social organisation  Settlement rules and history  Thonga language  Issues relating to cross border identities  Trade across the border  History of various traditional authorities in the area  Occupation of some areas by refugees of the Zulu wars  Influence on local customs by refugees of the Mozambican War of 1975-1990

The conventional view is that that the historical occupants of Maputaland, the Tembe- Thonga, migrated from Karanga in the present day Zimbabwe in the middle of the seventeenth century Junod (1962:23). However, the theory that the African societies of south-east Africa migrated there in fixed ethnic units, as in the case of the Tembe- Thonga, has been questioned by archaeological research and recent research on oral traditions of Zululand and Natal (Maggs 1989). Instead of migrating there in fixed ethnic groups, it is now argued that the African societies of south-east Africa emerged locally from long established communities of diverse origins and diverse cultures and languages. Nevertheless, whether the Tembe came from Karanga to establish their authority over the people of south-east Africa, or whether they emerged locally, reports from Portuguese sailors indicate that a chief Tembe was in control of the ruling chiefdom in the Delagoa Bay hinterland in the mid-1600s (Wright & C. Hamilton 1989:46-64 and Kuper 1997:74). Tembe and his followers gradually established their authority over the people who lived in this hinterland including the area to the immediate east of the study area. Due to the abilities of their strong and charismatic leaders, the Tembe-Thonga remained a unified chiefdom and gradually extended their influence. This unity was upset in the middle of the eighteenth century when a split in the ruling lineage led to the fragmentation of the chiefdom. The division came after the death of Silamboya in 1746. The descendants of Silamboya’s oldest son, Muhali, settled west of the Maputo River and north of the Usuthu River. This group, the senior branch of the Tembe-Thonga, became known as the Mututwen-Tembe. The other part of the Tembe-Thonga followed a junior son of Silamboya, Mangobe, and settled east of the Maputo River. This branch would later become known as the Mabudu or Maputo (Bryant 1965:290). The imposed international border of 1875 bisected the area where

Active Heritage cc for Enviroedge 4 Mkuze Interchange

the Mabudu branch settled. Being unable to control the vast area under his control, the chief of the junior branch, Mangobe, placed his sons in strategic positions so as to ensure his control. When Mangobe died, his first son, Nkupo, was named chief. However, his younger son, Mabudu, soon established himself as the stronger leader and took the chieftainship from his older brother (Hedges 1978:137). With the army now at his disposal Mabudu was able to dominate all trade between Europeans who landed at Delagoa Bay and local people living in the hinterland. Through this domination the Mabudu became, by the middle of the eighteenth century, the strongest political and economic unit in south-east Africa (Smith 1972:178-184). The people under his authority, which gradually increased, became known as the abakwaMabudu or the people of Mabudu’s land (Webb and Wright 1979:157). By the early 1800s the Mabudu chiefdom stretched from the Maputo River in the west to the Indian Ocean in the east, and from Delagoa (Maputo) Bay in the north to as far south as Lake St. Lucia (Felgate 1982:1). This extensive area included the present-day Ingwavuma..

During the early 1800s similar processes of political centralisation were taking place amongst the Mthetwa, Ndwandwe and later the Zulu chiefdoms to the immediate south east of Ingwavuma. The Zulu eventually defeated the other groups and established themselves as the dominant power in south-east Africa (Wright & Hamilton 1989:67 and Laband 1995). The Mabudu were never attacked by, nor directly involved in any war with the Zulu. They were, however indirectly affected by wars of conquest the Zulu waged in the northern part of Zululand in the first half of the nineteenth century (Omer- Cooper 1975:57). Various groups of refugees passed through the Mabudu chiefdom during the reign of Shaka. Many of them settled among the Mabudu. The people who crossed the southern boundary of the Mabudu chiefdom brought with them languages and customs foreign to the Mabudu. Over time, Mabudu identity became less distinctive as people adopted many customs of those living south of them (Bryant 1964:292). As more and more people from the southern chiefdoms crossed into the Mabudu chiefdom, an increasing amount of prestige was attached to being Zulu and speaking isiZulu, since the Zulu were the dominant political force. The Zulu cultural influence in the greater Ingwavuma area was however not complete. People who fled the onslaught of the Zulu only stayed in the area for a short period before they moved on (Felgate 1982:11). Furthermore, in exchange for tribute paid, the Zulu recognised the Mabudu as leaders of a vast territory. This, to an extent, secured their sovereignty (Bradley 1974). The relationship between the Mabudu and the Zulu differed markedly from that which the Zulu instituted with other chiefdoms. Ballard (1978) states that

Active Heritage cc for Enviroedge 5 Mkuze Interchange

although the Mabudu ‘paid tribute to the Zulu kings and cooperated on a military and economic level, they enjoyed much greater independence than the chiefdoms south of St. Lucia. Despite the Zulu influence, Maputaland, remained politically and culturally distinct from areas to the north, south and west. The people of the area spoke a unified language – xiRonga (Thonga). With some exceptions, notably the Ngubane and Khumalo, they accepted the rule of Mabudu chiefs (Felgate 1982:11). They practised customs that were unique to the area and differed from those of their Zulu, Swazi and Tsonga neighbours (Webster 1991:250). Nevertheless, many siSwati-speaking people crossed the nearby border and settled at Ingwavuma. Today a large percentage of the inhabitants in the immediate vicinity of Ingwavuma are Swazi people with social and political ties to Swaziland in the west.

During the colonial period the area was frequented by hunters, traders, and later missionaries (Bruton et al 1980). However, sites and structures associated with these activities need to be identified and placed in an inventory. Likewise during the more recent past many refugees of Mozambique crossed the international border and settled in the area (Klopper 2004). Sites belonging to this more recent “struggle era history” are also protected by national heritage legislation and needs to be surveyed and placed in an inventory.

Apart from human history the greater Maputaland also has extensive fossil deposits and geomorphology dating back to the Cretaceous, Tertiary and Quaternary periods. The Cretaceous fauna yielded by sequences includes ammonites, bivalves, gastropods, and nautiloids in abundance. Vertebrates are uncommon, only fish and reptiles being noted so far. Plant remains are relatively abundant in the form of logs and lignite chips. The Tertiary limestone deposits contain marine macro-fossils, calcareous nanno-fossils and planktic foraminifers (Avery 1980). Shell imprints have been found imprinted in concretions to the immediate south of Thembe Elephant Park and may therefore palaeontological significance (Anderson 2008).

3 BACKGROUND INFORMATION OF THE SURVEY

Active Heritage cc for Enviroedge 6 Mkuze Interchange

3.1 Methodology

A desktop study was conducted of the archaeological databases housed in the KwaZulu-Natal Museum. The SAHRIS website was consulted to obtain information on past heritage surveys in the area and on heritage site particulars. In addition, the available archaeological literature covering the greater Ingwavuma area was also consulted. A ground survey of the footprint, following standard and accepted archaeological procedures, was conducted. An area of 20m was surveyed on either side of roads P443, D1886, and L 1380.

3.2 Restrictions encountered during the survey

3.2.1 Visibility

Visibility was good although the vegetation was dense at places. It must also be mentioned that Anderson (2008) found various heritage sites buried below sand in the greater Maputaland area. He noted that these sites would have been archaeologically invisible has it not been that the developers excavated a long and deep trench that exposed some of these deposits. It is therefore entirely possible those archaeological sites may also be covered in sand in the study area and that they are invisible due to geomorphological factors.

3.2.2 Disturbance

No disturbance of any potential heritage features was noted.

3.3 Details of equipment used in the survey

GPS: Garmin Etrek Digital cameras: Canon Powershot A460 All readings were taken using the GPS. Accuracy was to a level of 5 m.

4 DESCRIPTION OF SITES AND MATERIAL OBSERVED

4.1 Locational data

Active Heritage cc for Enviroedge 7 Mkuze Interchange

Province: KwaZulu-Natal Town: Mkuze Municipality: Jozini

5 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE (HERITAGE VALUE)

The area adjacent to the proposed development is disturbed and appears to have been ploughed in the not to recent past (Figs 3 -8). .No archaeological or heritage sites were observed adjacent to the proposed development. Although some African homesteads are situated adjacent to the existing roads no graves were observed within 100m from the proposed road development. Those graves that were observed by the consultant were all situated well beyond the road development zone. The proposed development will have no impact these graves. The study area is not part of any known cultural landscape (Table 2).

Table 2. Evaluation and statement of significance.

Active Heritage cc for Enviroedge 8 Mkuze Interchange

Significance criteria in terms of Section 3(3) of the NHRA

Significance Rating

1. Historic and political significance - The importance of the cultural None. heritage in the community or pattern of South Africa’s history. 2. Scientific significance – Possession of uncommon, rare or None. endangered aspects of South Africa’s cultural heritage. 3. Research/scientific significance – Potential to yield information None. that will contribute to an understanding of South Africa’s natural or cultural heritage. 4. Scientific significance – Importance in demonstrating the principal None. characteristics of a particular class of South Africa’s cultural places/objects. 5. Aesthetic significance – Importance in exhibiting particular None. aesthetic characteristics valued by a community or cultural group. 6. Scientific significance – Importance in demonstrating a high None. degree of creative or technical achievement at a particular period. 7. Social significance – Strong or special association with a particular None. community or cultural group for social, cultural or spiritual reasons. 8. Historic significance – Strong or special association with the life None. and work of a person, group or organization of importance in the history of South Africa. 9. The significance of the site relating to the history of slavery in South None. Africa.

5.1 Field Rating

Not applicable, as no heritage sites occur on the footprint.

Table 3. Field rating and recommended grading of sites (SAHRA 2005)

Active Heritage cc for Enviroedge 9 Mkuze Interchange

Level Details Action National (Grade I) The site is considered to be of Nominated to be declared by SAHRA National Significance Provincial (Grade II) This site is considered to be of Nominated to be declared by Provincial significance Provincial Heritage Authority Local Grade IIIA This site is considered to be of HIGH The site should be retained as a significance locally heritage site Local Grade IIIB This site is considered to be of HIGH The site should be mitigated, and significance locally part retained as a heritage site Generally Protected A High to medium significance Mitigation necessary before destruction Generally Protected B Medium significance The site needs to be recorded before destruction Generally Protected C Low significance No further recording is required before destruction

6 RECOMMENDATIONS

The proposed construction of Mkuze Interchange on National Route 2, Section 31 (KM29.30), Mkuze, and Jozini Local Municipality may proceed in terms of heritage values as no heritage sites are in any danger of being destroyed or altered. However, it should also be pointed out that the KwaZulu-Natal Heritage Act requires that operations exposing archaeological and historical residues should cease immediately pending an evaluation by the heritage authorities.

7 RISK PREVENTATIVE MEASURES ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION

Maputaland has a rich archaeological history. Construction work and excavations may yield archaeological and/or cultural material. If any heritage features are exposed by construction work then all work should stop immediately and the provincial heritage agency, Amafa, should be contacted for further evaluation. Attention is drawn to the South African Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (Act No. 25 of 1999) and the KwaZulu- Natal Heritage Act (Act no 4 of 2008) which, requires that operations that expose archaeological or historical remains should cease immediately, pending evaluation by the provincial heritage

Active Heritage cc for Enviroedge 10 Mkuze Interchange

8 MAPS AND PHOTOGRAPHS

Figure 1. Map of the Study area showing the locality of the proposed Mkuze Interchange in northern KwaZulu-Natal (Source: Enviroedge).

Figure 2. Map of the proposed Mkuze Interchange

Active Heritage cc for Enviroedge 11 Mkuze Interchange

Figure 3. The road linking Mkuze with the N2

Figure 4. The terrain on the north eastern section of the footprint

Active Heritage cc for Enviroedge 12 Mkuze Interchange

Figure 5. Evidence for previous farming activities are evident immediately adjacent to the proposed development. However, none of these has any heritage significance.

Figure 6. View towards the south with the road running to Mkuze in the background. More evidence for past ploughing and farming activities.

Active Heritage cc for Enviroedge 13 Mkuze Interchange

Figure 7. View towards the east, no heritage sites have been observed.

Figure 8. Photograph of the present interchange.

Active Heritage cc for Enviroedge 14 Mkuze Interchange

9 REFERENCES

Anderson, G. 2008. Heritage survey of the Proposed Thembe Masizwane Lodge, KwaZulu-Natal (for Exigent Environmental). Unpublished Report.

Avery, G. 1980. Palaeontology and archaeology of Maputaland. In Bruton, M. N. and Cooper, K. H. (eds). Studies on the Ecology of Maputaland. Rhodes University. Pg: 346-357.

Ballard, C. 1978. ‘Migrant labour in Natal 1860-1879: with special reference to Zululand and the Delagoa Bay hinterland.’ Journal of Natal and Zulu History, I, 25-42.

Bryant, A. T. 1965. Olden times in Zululand and Natal. Cape Town: C. Struik.

Bruton, M.N, Smith. M, Taylor, R. H. 1980. A Brief History of Human Involvement in Maputaland. In Bruton, M. N. & Cooper, K. H. (eds). Studies on the Ecology of Maputaland. Pg 432-459. Rhodes University: Grahamstown.

Derwent, S. 2006. KwaZulu-Natal Heritage Sites: A Guide to Some Great Places. David Phillips: Cape Town

Feely, J. 1980. Archaeological survey Mfolozi Park. Unpublished Report.

Felgate, W. S. 1982. The Tembe Thonga of Natal and Mozambique: An Ecological Approach. Occasional Publications Number 1. Department of African Studies. University of Natal, Durban.

Hall, M. 1980. Field Survey: The Ecology of the Iron Age. Unpublished report

Hedges, D.W. 1978. Trade and Politics in Southern Mozambique and Zululand in the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries. Unpublished PhD thesis, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London: Department of History.

Junod, H.A. 1962. The Life of a South Africa Tribe. New York:Two Volumes, University Books Inc.

Kuper, A. 1997. ‘The academic frontier: History and Social Anthropology in South Africa.’ In P. McAllister (ed) Culture and the Commonplace. Anthropological Essays in Honour of David Hammond-Tooke. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press, 69-84.

Active Heritage cc for Enviroedge 15 Mkuze Interchange

Huffman, T. N. 2007. Handbook to the Iron Age: The Archaeology of Pre-colonial Farming Societies in Southern Africa. University of KwaZulu-Natal Press. Pietermaritzburg.

Klopper, R. 2004. Border Crossings: life in the Mozambique/South African Borderland. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Pretoria: Pretoria.

Maggs, T. The Iron Age farming communities. In Duminy, A. and Guest, B. 1989. Natal and Zululand: from Earliest Times to 1910. A New History. Pg. 28-46. University of Natal Press. Pietermaritzburg.

Mitchell, P. 2002. The Archaeology of Southern Africa. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge

Omer-Cooper, J.D. 1975. The Zulu Aftermath. A Nineteenth-Century Revolution in Bantu Africa. Norfolk: Lowe & Brydone Ltd.

Penner, D. 1970. Archaeological Survey in Zululand Game Reserves. Natal Parks Board. Unpublished Report.

SAHRA, 2005. Minimum Standards for the Archaeological and the Palaeontological Components of Impact Assessment Reports, Draft version 1.4.

Smith, A. 1972. ‘The trade of Delagoa Bay as a factor of Nguni politics 1750-1835.’ In L. Thompson (ed) African Societies in Southern Africa. London: Heinemann Educational Books, 171-189.

Webb, C. and J.B. Wright (eds.) 1979. The James Stuart Archive of Recorded Oral Evidence Relating to the History of the Zulu and Neighbouring Peoples. Volume 2. University of Natal (Pietermaritzburg) and Killie Cambell Africana Library (Durban).

Webster, D.J. 1991. ‘Abafazi baThonga bafihlakala. Ethnicity and Gender in a KwaZulu border community.’ In A.D. Spiegel and P.A. Mcallister (eds.), Tradition and transition in Southern Africa: Festschrift for Phillip and Iona Mayer. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press, 243-271.

Wright, J. & C. Hamilton 1989. ‘Tradition and transformations. The Phongolo- Mzimkhulu region in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.’ In A. Duminy and BGuest (eds.) Natal and Zululand from Earliest Times to 1910. A New History. Pietermaritzburg: University of Natal, 49-82.

Active Heritage cc for Enviroedge 16 Mkuze Interchange

Active Heritage cc for Enviroedge 17